the preposition qdm - a pseudo-anti-anthropomorphism in the targums.pdf

7/28/2019 The Preposition QDM - A Pseudo-Anti-Anthropomorphism in the Targums.pdf

1/4

)o(ANTHROPOMORPHISMS AND ANTHROPOPATHISMS t177 l

xx1lso"l

THE PREPOSITION tr]P (,BEFORE')A PSEUDO-ANTI-ANTHROPOMO RPHI SM INTHtr TARGUMSIr has often been asserted that lvhereas the Hebrew Bible indulgesfreely in anthropomorphic and anthropopathic phrases descriptive ofGod, the various targums have, on the whole, avoided the attributionof human forms and feelings to the Deity. This has been assumed toreflect a refinement in Israelite Jewish theology that developed duringthe last millenium tcr. For example:The theology of the early books of Israel's history and religion took no

pains to obviate the appearance of a very distinct anthropomorphiccharacter, but the time came when the main feature of Jel'v-ish criticismand exegesis was the anxiety to.remove or soften doq'n all reference to Godthat could give rise to misunderstanding in the popular mind. . . , Theclearest expression of this hermeneutic principle is to be found in theTargums, w'here 'everything was avoided that could lead to euoneous orundignified conceptions of God',.And more recently:

The Targum aims at the elimination of all phrases .r'r.hich are reminis-cent of anthropomorphism, and to substitute for them other expres-sions ra'hich are better suited for the more refined ideas concerning Godof later generations. . . . The Targum avoids using Biblical expressionswhich so speak of God as being possessed of a body just like a humanbeing, with hands and eyes, etc.2' T. \&-alker, 'Targum', A D;ctio,Mry oJ the B;ble (cd. J. Ilastings, er al,)(Nerv York: Scribner's, r9o3), Vol.4, p. 679.'1 A, Sperber, The Biblc in Atanaic, Vol. IV B, 'The Targum and the HebrewBible' (Leiden: Brill, 1973), p. 37. Several other standard works containingsimilar statements are: W. Bacher, 'Targum', Jewish Encyclopedia (New York,rgor), Vol. rz, p. 6o; B. Grossl'eld, 'Bible: Translations, Aramaic (Targumim)',Encyclopaedia Judarza (Jerusalem, r97l), Vol. 4, p. 842 (relies strongly uponWalker and Bacher); Y. Komlosh, The Bible in thc Light of tlv Aramaic Transla-rroxs (Tel-Aviv: Bar Ilan University/Dvir, 1973), p. ro3; E. Schtrer, History oJthe Je@ish People in the Age of Jesus C,zrst (revised and edited by G. Vermesand F. X{illar), (Edinburgh: Clark, 1973), Vol. r, p, roo; and M. McNamara,'Targrrrns', IDB Supl' (Nashvillc: Abingdon, 1976), p. 860. See also rotes 6and 8 belon.

t.ion that is normally eliminated by the targumim, is introduced intothe text in the context of anthtopomorphisms. The following cases^re typical:Gen. xli 16 '/b1ny,th't !/wn pr,hNeof nz qdn11y,rb j !tn, tlplhNum. xvii 19 '$,i,taa


2/4

to.ii lsor ITo what measure these and other similar generalizations_are indeed

eccurate, must await another forum than the present "t-t1"1"' For themoment,itwill.sufficetonotethatcertainbooksoftheHebrewBiblemay contain occasional examples of 'refined' language alongside theirmarry "rrthropomorphic e*pres,io"s'r' It is also undeniable-althoughat times ignoied, for the comfort of a generalization-that some of thecrudest biblical anthropomorphisms are perpetuated and even amplifiedin the targums-alorrgside the common circumlocution and paraphrasticavoidancJ of human forms., The questions as to just when the targumsavoid anthropomorphisms and pricisely which phra-ses-are avoided ortoned down,^ ", *"u as the more basic question of whether there isevidence for a consistent theology underlying this targumic activity,will require a full-size monograph. The limited purpose of the presentstudy, ihen, is to examine one widespread targumic feature that -hastraditionally been labelled as a circumlocutionary device for avoidingdirect contact or intercourse between man and God, namely, the 'bufferpreposition' ETiT ('before').' The following examples, taken from various contexts, demonstratejust how the preposition ll1i2 is introduced:rr. Gen. xvii. 18 And Abraham said to the Lord- Targ (O PsJ N) And Abraham sud before the Lordz. ExJ.'x. 8 Go serve the Lord your God- Targ (O PsJ N) Go serve befote the Lord your Goda

. , e.g, the frequent wse of kaood ('glory', o: according to the new translationof tt"j"*i.tt Publication.society 'piese'ce') as a substitute for God himself:,i. Ciliy of th" Lord is seen bv ine Israelites (819d' lui'1, ro.; xxxiii' r8;L"r. i*. 6 ; N.rm. xiv. ro) ; abides upon Mount sinai (Exod.. xxiv. 16); and passegl"for"-tvtor"s (Exod. #xn. zz;.-fnat the word'glory'is merely a verbalt"lrtir"i" f"t God and does not represent an independant-sgrrogale being, is;b;]";* the adjoining verses: 'for man shall not see Me' (Exod'. xxxiii' zo)and ,until .I have passeJ by' (v. zz). The Aramaic equivalent-of kaood is yeqar,""J

i. ir"q""ntly "mployei by all of the targums in a similar fashion.; il "**pt" i, B*oi. *r, ,7, .The sanctuary, o Tnrd, which Your handsfru1r" "rt"Ufrfr"d', which is translated: 'Your holy temple, O Lord; which Yourirr-n""a" hut"' pe"fe"ted' (Neofiti, Pserrdo-Jonathan, and the FragmentTargums).- iTn" ioffowing editions of targumic texts are utilized in this study: oNQELos(: Ot, A. Sperb'er, The Bible iAramaic Vol. I (Leiden: Brilf 19-59); rsruoo)""*ii^"'tJ Ftlil p. Rieder, Pseudo-Jonathan: Taryum Jo!?thy ben Uziel oniii-paiititft (Jerusalem: Saibmon's,-r974); Nrorlrr (:N): The-.Palestiniani;rg"; to the Fentuteuch: Codex Vsthan (Neofiti r),,-Fac1n1le.edition (Jeru-ttluioi M"nor, rgTo); Cairo Geniti Fragments (: CG): P' Kahle' Masoreteniit Wrtt*t ff ireprini, Hildesheim: Olms, 1967), pp' r-64; rneGMENr rARGvMs(- FT): M. L. Klcin, ih, F,og *t'Tatgums of the Pentateuch' AnalectabiUli." i6 (Ro-o, Biblical In-etjtule-, 1978), in press'. Cf. A,'Tel (norcnttrat), 'Ms. Neoihpi r: The Paleetrruan'Targum to thePentrteuch', Irrial Orliiii Stua;it +irgl;,35: 'The uoage ElTi2 h?D ('serve

xxllllso+ l3. Deut. i. 4r We have sinned against the Lord" iurg (O bsJ N) We have sinned beJore tt,e Lorda. Exoi. xvi 8 Your complaints are not against us' but againstthe LordTarg (N) Your complaints are not against us' but before t}:'eLord'r

Ithadbeenassumedthatthesetranslationaladjustmentswerearesult of the refinement of Israel's concePt of the Deity' and of theeventual realization of God's transcendence and incorporeality',Man nolorrg", addressed God forthrightly, nor did he directly serve the Lordo, ir, "g"irrst him. Man did n-ot involve God in these human activities;he couli only perform them in the removed presence-of-the.Lord-orasthetargumputit,beforethelord.Infact,somescholarshavegoneEs far as tJ refei to this iranslational shift as an anti-anthropomorphism'2-ttt" q"*tion that must now be asked is: Is the introduction of thepr"pori,ior, tr.riz by the targum in place-of the biblical nota accusatioi llll[*fri"t designates"God us Ih" direct object of man's action), or in placeof other more direct prepositions, actually intended for -the avoidanceof Biblical anthropomorphi.**, or for the obviation of direct relation-shipbetweenmanandGod.Ibelievethatthereisextensiveevidencetoshowthatthereisprobablynoconnectionatallbetweentheuseofpreposition ETi2 and the afiejed anti-anthropomorphic theology of thetargums.,. i ,rr*"y of the Aramaic portions of the -Bo{ o.f.Daniel shows thatwhereas the king Nebuchadnezzar speaks fo the chaldeans or /o Daniel,randwhereascommonersalsospeaklooneanother'4commonersdonotaddress direct speech to the king, but rather before (tr1y') the king'sLikewise, Daniel comes in to Arioch,6 but he coines in' or is brought'before,_MLK)isusuallyemp]oyedindescribingtherelationbetweenmanandGod.' And footnoteloi ;ihit "*pt""tion was used (by the targum-MlK)in order to avoid an anthropomorphism"r O and PsJ have: ' . . . but against the-memra ("word") of the.Lord''2 E, Levine extends it " .rt" "of D1i2 for anti-anthropomorphic purposesbeyond the bounds .ii"'g"*i" fi;?t+t 'The phrase:'-:1P JD "from beforethe Lord" is used ;; f?il;"tlv in the various targumini' ind is the onlvcharacteristic ,urg*rrrr-i ;;;t;t-i avoiding anthropomorphlt- ^"1d anthro-;;;ht."t ;h"t ii rt""a- t'";;t*tt in. Jewish Aramaic outside of the targumtexts.' (8. Levine, iir2,ii"ili V""iin of Ruth' Analecta Biblica 58 (Rome:Biblicai Institute, 1973), P. 9o')' Cf' p' 5o3 n' 4' above'3 Dan. ii.5,7,26,47;iii' 14,24;v'7,r3iui' i7'zr'allusingtheprepositionallamed.a e.g. Dan. ii. 15's D-an. ii. g, ro, rt,27,36; v' 17; vi' 13' 14'6 Dan. ii. z,4, or'fo his house', in vi' rr'

r

l


3/4

xxivbefore the king.I And again, people do not fear thefear before him.z

xxv[5o6 Ithe human context to realize that it is not all related to the avoidanceof anthropomorphism. Foi examPle:

Gen. xiv. 4 Twelve years they served ChedorlaomerTarg (N) Twelve years they served before ChedodaomerGen xxvii. a9 Let peoples serve you (i.e. Jacob)Targ (N FT) Let peoples serve before youExod. xx. 5, And you shall not serve them (i'e' idols)Targ (N PsJ) And you shall not sewe before them'There are literally tens of cases in the various Palestinian targums ofthe Pentateuch in which the Hebrew verb 'lfy ('to serve'), taking ahuman direct object (with or without the accusative DN), is transformedinto ntp nbD ('serve before').rSimiiarly, nibtical phrases that employ the prepositional lamed, such

as, ,to be a slave /o Someone', 'to sacrifice /o idols' and 'to bow down tosomeone of to some idol' may appear in the targums with the prepositiono-rit.zStill another group of verbs for which the targums replace the prepo-sitional lamed with tr-tiz is that of 'crying, begging, imploring, andpraying'. For example:

Gen. xli. 55 And the people cried to PharaohTarg (O ptJ N CC) And the people cfied before Pharaoh3Num. xi. ra And the people cried out to MosesTarg (N) And the people cried out before Moses'aIn this context, there are three verses that are especially misleading:

Num.xi.rAndthepeoplewerespeakingevil.intheearsetlN:) o/ the Lordxi. r8 For you have wept in the ears o/ the Lordxiv. z8 . . . Saith the Lord, as you have spoken in My ems'Now, all three of these verses are translated by O and PsJ 'before (D.]iZ)the Lord' or ,before me,' which, again, might have been mistaken for anavoidance of anthropomorphism. However, when we examine the tar-gumic treatment of itris phrase in the human context, we find the very

I e.g. Gen. xxvii.4o; xxix. r5, r8; xxxi.4r; Exod' xiv' 5, rz; xxi'-z; xxiii' 33;Deut."t. 9; vii. 16; xvii. 3; xx. rr. These all argue against A' Tal (Rosenthal);see p. 5o3 n. 4, above., ".J. Gen. xxvii. 37 @sJ N); Exod. xxii. 19 (N); Deut. xxx' r7 (N); xxxii.r7 (N)--3'CG cited here is an additional fragment of MS. E of P. Kahle (see p. 5o3n. 3), which was published by A. Diez Macho,'Nuevos Fragmentos del TargumPalestinense', Sefarad r5 (r955), 37.a Additional examples are: Gen. xlii. zr; Exod. v. r5; Num. xi. z, rg.

lsos Jking, but rather

. we are led to conclude that the use of the indirect preposition DTj2in the Book of Daniel is out of deference to high office or nobility, andnot related to the nature of the Deity. It is used as an expression ofrespect or honour towards a human king; and there is no widence ofit being any more than just that, when used in relation to the divineGod.: Thus, we find E'tp being used in perfect parallel in both humanand divine contexts, in the very same verse: i . . . as before Him (i.e.:h: Goq of Daniel) I was found innocent; and also befori thee, O king,I.have done no wrong.'4a. Returning to the targums, we find precisely the same .situationprevailing. The use of D'tP is not confined to the divine context, butis rather an expression of deference that is frequently applied to manand to human institutions.The basic targumic usage of F'rp is as the translational equivalentof the Hebrew prepositions tlD), r:D:, t:D bg etc., in all contexts.s Inaddition, it is used to translate certain semantically related expressions,such as t1.'9b ('in the sight of,, ,before the eyes oi';.0 1, also'translatesthe causal preposition ttbD ('in the face of,, aon account of').2 1gorr" otthese verses has ever posed any problem.The cases that have been considered anti-anthropomorphic are thosein which D-rj2 replaces the nota accusatiui I\N., as in example z, cited above(Exod. x. 8), or in

Deut. x. rz And to serve the Lord your GodTarg (O PsJ N) And to sewe before the-Lord your God.However, one needs only t9 observe the same transrational device int put. ii.24, z5; iii. 13; iv. 3, 5; v. 13, 15, z3; vi. rg.2 Dan. v. r9.e This comparison of the targumic usage with that of biblical Aramaic wasproposed by s. D. Luzzatto,-rso years ago; in his book ohev Ger (rai"; tteand .edition, cracow, 1895, has recenily-been reprinted: Jerusalem:. I\4akor.1969); see p. rz.a Dan. vi. e3. Another striking parallelism is found in Dan. v. r9, .All thepeoples, nations and languages trembled and feared before hin, (i.e. Nebuchad-nezzar); and vi. 27, 'NIen shall tremble and fear bifore the God of Daniel,,sj.e. Gen. xliii. 15, 'And they stood, before Joseph'l in trt. """y .*" *u*.,as Gen. xviii, zz, 'And Abraham stood bifore ihe l_ord.',_i::,*r9*. xlii. .J, 'And he- (Joseph) -bound him (Simeon) before their eyes(Eilrlry?). Targ (PsJ N) 'And he bound hkn be;fore thern.'- I u.S.Gen. vii. ,j,'Because.o/(tpn) the waters of the flood'; Targ (O psJ9C Nl '\r.9m b,ef:ii (E Tp p) ;h; *uiltr of the flood, (meaning,'of "o-,rrr", .ona:co.unt of ') and Exttd. ix. r'r,'Because o;f the boils,; farg (O prii{) ,From beforetho boile.'


4/4

xxviI sozJsame translation in no fewer than fourteen instances.r It is evidentthat the biblical idiom 'in the ears of is taken figuratively in a// contexts,and is translated as such in all of the targums., Th"r" is, th.refor", noconnection between this normal translational device and anthropomor-phism.r

,.-91".i"r, gx,amgle of the transformation of the Hebrew preposirions?N ('to') and ?9 ('upon', 'about') into ETjz is from the juridicai setting:

-t76-Drrfun Dll'lnb ntNtlD .t

Deut, xxv. rTarg (N)

ll1?? |66........... ..10:tt57,76.. .1.1:t)57 ,76, . .30: l)'1)'lEf

43..,..........1:Rt43..,..........18:Nr53.,..... ....,.23:Nt87............,5:rt60..,,.......,,14:'rr43,.,..,,.....,28:'rr90 . . . . , , , . . . . . . 1 8 : l)91.............56:r)D r tl'l63...........,.3: h

And they go to the lawAnd they go before the judgesAnd when Moses sat in judgement:Exod. xviii. r3 The people stood about MosesTarg (PsJ N) The people stood. before Moses.one stands respectfully before the court of justice, but one does notapproach it directly-even if it be only a human institution.In conclusion, the use of the buffei preposition E'tiz in the targumsas a substitute for the nota accusatit:i nN, or for oiher more directprepositions, is common in both the divine and the human contexts.It occurs as an expression of deference to a respectable person or insti-tution. It also occurs as a natural result of the idiomatic variance between

biblical Hebrew and rargumic Aramaic, or simpry, as the translationof a_biblical phrase that was understood figuratively. Ail of these usagesapply equally in reference to man or God. It is, therefore, evident thatthe introduction by the -various targumim of ih" pr.poritio' n.r;2, i'all of these cases, is not for the avoiJance or circurilocution of biblicalanthropomorphisms.

r O: Gen. xx.8; xxiii. ro, 13, 16;.xli: rg;1.4; Exod. x. z;.xi. z;xvii. r4;xxiv. 7; Deut. v. r; xxxi. 28, 3o;-xxxii. 44; and pd: C"rr. **.t-; n;;.';"i". i;eut. v. r.z.PsJ,N,and-FTgenerallyrenoerthephrase,inthehearingof,(_.,ilrght D:),as does th-e modern English R.s.v. rn iact, the paraphrastic transration .in thehearing of is so colnrnon in N, that orr" "f the grossators has added it in themargin of that Ms., in a verse that has intended rear ears of n".r, anJ rtooa.The case in point is Gen. xxxv. 4, 'And the rings that *"r" or irr.it "ur",,hich. is correcrly transrated in a'iiteral fashion 6y a[ of irrl i*g,r*". rrr"thoughtless gloss to N, 'that were in their hearing' ,i. of "o.r.." u rryp"i"orr""tiorr.- I cf. J' shunary, 'Avoidance of Anthropomofrhism in the Targum of psarms,,Texh* 5 (r966), r39, note 16.

the preposition qdm - a pseudo-anti-anthropomorphism in the targums.pdf

Documents